[Numpy-discussion] preferred numpy build system

Brian Granger ellisonbg.net@gmail....
Sun Feb 8 14:26:07 CST 2009

> Yes, I am investigating cmake, it's pretty cool. I wrote some macros
> for cython etc. What I like about cmake is that it is cross platform
> and it just produces makefiles on linux, or visual studio files (or
> whatever) on windows.  When I get more experience with it, I'll post
> here.

Yes, while I haven't played with cmake much, it does look very nice.

> What I don't like on cmake is that it uses it's own language, instead
> of python, on the other hand, so far everything seems to just work.

I too don't like the idea of cmake having its own language.  While I
love to learn new languages, I like to have good reasons and I'm not
sure that building software is a good reason.

I have been playing with Scons and I really do like the fact that it
is Python.  While I haven't tried it yet, I am pretty sure that we
could use IPython to interactively debug a Scons build.  That would be
really nice!

> Contrary to numscons, where it looks almost like a new python program
> just to build numpy.

But hold on, it is not fair to compare cmake with numscons (this is an
apples and oranges thing).  You should compare cmake with *Scons*
itself.  The problem with comparing cmake with numscons is that cmake
can't do what numscons does - i.e., plug into distutils.  There is a
lot of extra things that distutils does other than build extensions
and cmake won't do these things out of the box.  Obviously, someone
could get cmake to do these things, but then you are developing a
complete distutils replacement.  And I think that any distutils
replacement should done in Python.



> Ondrej
> _______________________________________________
> Numpy-discussion mailing list
> Numpy-discussion@scipy.org
> http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

More information about the Numpy-discussion mailing list